Archived: Westwood Care Home

Over the course of the day we spent time observing the care and support that had been provided to people the home. We also reviewed care plans and other relevant documentation to support our findings.

On the day of the inspection two people lived at the home and we were able to speak with one person. We spoke with the providers and one staff member. We also spoke on the telephone with two family members after out inspection.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found '

Is the service safe?

One person who lived at the home told us that they felt safe living at Westwood. One family member also told us that they felt their relative was safe living at the home and their needs were met by staff that knew them. One staff member also told us that they felt people were safe and their needs were met.

Staff had received Mental Capacity Act training. However, the provider assured us that they would ensure that improvements continued to ensure decisions that were made on behalf of someone who lacked the capacity to understand were done so with the involvement of other professionals and family members where appropriate. This would ensure all decisions were made in the best interest of the person.

We found that the provider had risk assessed equipment and provided staff with instructions for the use of equipment. This meant that there were procedures in place to ensure risks were reduced and people remained safe.

We checked the medicines of the two people who lived at the home. The provider assured us that they would continue to make improvements to the management of medicines so that this was done in the safest possible way.

Is the service effective?

Each person had an individual plan of care, based on their health, physical and social needs. This included information about people's life stories with some photographs to bring people's stories alive when they looked at these.

We spoke with the staff member about the meals people received at the home. They told us that there were always food and drink for people and the meals were good. We also asked one family member who confirmed that meals looked good.

We saw that staff had received training to enable them to meet the individual needs of people that they supported.

Is the service caring?

During our inspection we saw the providers and staff member sit with people chatting and passing the time of day. This was done with kindness and showed that staff cared about the people who lived at the home.

One person who lived at the home told us, 'I am happy here' and 'I like them (the staff).'

One family member that we spoke said, 'We were totally happy.' Another family member said, 'More than happy.'

During our inspection we saw the provider and staff member sat with people chatting and passing the time of day. This was done with kindness and showed that staff cared about the people who lived at the home.

People who lived at the home looked comfortable around the providers and staff during the day. We saw that the provider and the staff member treated people with respect and used their preferred names.

We saw that one person's right to privacy and dignity was not maintained. This was because the doctor assessed their health needs in a communal area of the home.

Is the service responsive?

We spoke with the member of staff about how they engaged people in things that interested them in their lives. The staff member told us that there were regular organised events such as singing and a person came into the home to play the organ.

Staff worked in partnership with other professionals to make sure people received appropriate care, treatment and support to meet their health needs. During the day a doctor and community nurse visited people at the home.

One family member told us that they felt comfortable to raise any complaints that they had with the providers. This family member was sure if they had any complaints the providers would take action to put things right.

Is the service well led?

The provider completed a number of checks so that any areas for improvement were identified and work was ongoing. This helped the provider to assure themselves that people received good care and were safe. For example, the provider would speak with people and staff, and check that records had been completed correctly.

Our observations during this inspection supported that there were sufficient staff available to meet the needs of the two people who lived at the home so that they received the right care, at the right time. We found that minimum staffing levels of two staff on duty at all times day and night had been identified, planned for and were met at the time of this inspection. This was confirmed by the provider and one staff member.

The provider told us that they were going to send some satisfaction questionnaires to family members in the near future to gain their views. We saw that this had been done in the past to people who had lived at the home. This would further support the provider's ongoing improvements to the care people received and the home environment.

We carried out this inspection to check that the provider had made the required improvements. At the time of this inspection there were six people living at the home. We spent time with the provider to review the action they had taken to address the concerns from the previous inspection.

We spoke with people about what it was like to live in the home. They told us: 'The food is lovely. I love me food'. People said: 'We have a chat, listen to the radio, I like it that way'. 'I like me room'. 'We had exercises this morning'. We found that people's needs had been assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. Staff told us they were aware of each person's needs and how to give care and support to meet those needs. People told us staff were: 'Pretty good' and that they were: 'Kind, if they were rude I would tell them'.

We saw that people lived in a home that was clean and protected them from the risk of cross infection. We looked at how people's medicines had been managed in the home and found that improvements were needed to ensure that medicines received into the home were managed effectively.

At our previous inspection on 8 March 2013, we found that action had been needed to review the quality of the service provided. We found during this inspection that improvements had been made.

We looked at a selection of care plans for four people. These care plans had been improved following our last inspection as they identified each person's needs. This was positive as staff had the information required to meet each person's needs so that people were not at risk of receiving inappropriate care.

We looked at the medicines for some people who lived at the home and found that improvements had been made following our last inspection. People had received their medicines as prescribed by their doctors to meet their health needs.

Staff had received the training they needed to be able to safely support the people who lived at the home. This included training which helped staff to recognise and report any allegations of abuse so that people were protected from the risk of harm.

There were no regular arrangements in place for monitoring the quality of the service to ensure improvements were made and sustained for the benefit of people who lived at the home.

We spoke with three relatives of people who used the service. One person said their relative "couldn't be in a better place". Another person told us that they felt their relative was "really happy there" and that they themselves thought the service was "homely". All three of the relatives we spoke with were positive about the care provided and praised the care staff for the delivery of care.

We also spoke with care staff who showed a good understanding of people's current care needs. Regular staff meetings had been recently introduced so that staff could discuss people's care needs and care planning. Care staff we spoke with told us that they found these meetings useful as that it gave them an opportunity to review and discuss people's care needs with colleagues.

Practices for handling and administering medication at the service were being reviewed and care staff had recently completed computer based training on the handling and administration of medicines. Out of date medicines had been disposed of appropriately, but handling and administering practices were not robust enough to make sure people were protected from the risk of medication errors at the time of our inspection.